California aint Lehman Brothers.
Declaring bankruptcy would destroy the United States economy.
Posted by Duckman GR at May 21, 2009 10:55 PMIt's starting to look ominous for CA, the voters refusing any new revenue schemes was terrible.
As GOoPer clowns gas on about secession, a massive financial failure by CA is the sort of thing that really will strain the union. We'll clearly have to bail it out, and the wingnuts and their Noise Machine will go crazy over taxpayers bailing out "Democrat CA". Huge constraints will be imposed on the state if the feds have to get involved. And the absurd (Repub wrecked) constitution is a huge problem.
There's a feeling out there that things are getting better economically speaking (see the stock market). They aren't, really, and CA flat on its back, literally broke, its citizens having thrown up their hands in passivity and indifference (low turn-out on the props) isn't going to help matters any.
We all are in a heap o' trouble, with CA broke, paralyzed and helpless. Now THAT'S scary!
Posted by euzoius at May 22, 2009 06:19 AMI live in California and we have been fed the BS, starting with Ronald Regan, that you can keep taxes low and still have public services. I was against Prop 13 in 1978 because it imposed the 2/3 majority for raising taxes. The problem is we have Republicans who have taken a no new taxes oath and a Republican Govenor who has wanted to please everybody so he could run for the Senate. As to term limits they are a great thing but only allowing two terms is counter productive. We need to get rid of the 2/3 majority and fix term limits but polls show most Californians object to this so we will see if they like the deep cuts in spending and social services better.
Posted by PadrePio at May 22, 2009 06:49 AMThank, Mary, that indirectly answers some of the questions I had regarding the vote earlier this week.
Posted by idiosynchronic at May 22, 2009 07:12 AMYes, thank you Mary for covering the CA vote.
Posted by Seven of Six at May 22, 2009 07:24 AMSadly, that's what you get when you hire a has-been actor to do a politician's job. As if Reagan didn't give CA enough warning of how bad things could get.
Posted by Twinky P* at May 22, 2009 07:30 AMThe whole initative process needs to be changed.
If we had to have 55% to pass an initative instead of a simple majority alot of the crap that gets passed here would die a good death.
And damnit lower the 2/3 for a budget to 55% also. The republicans got billions in tax REDUCTIONS for business in the last budget that passed. A budget that was never ever balanced even before the tax cuts.
It is clear that the liberal governance of CA has been the reason for it's current delima. This is also true for the liberal NY and NJ which are not far behind CA. You should require congressmen and women to go to TX or FL and learn how to run a state.
In a previous post it was stated that "As California goes, so goes the country".
With Obama in charge of the countries economy, I am afraid this may be true.
Posted by manapp99 at May 22, 2009 08:24 AMArnie's a liberal? Yeah, right.
Posted by Twinky P* at May 22, 2009 09:27 AMIt is clear that the liberal governance of CA has been the reason for it's current delima.
Go to Wikipedia and look up the party of the California Governor for the past quarter century. The Republican party has had the Governorship all but 5 of the last 27 years.
But don't let facts get in the way of your opinions.
Posted by Anonny at May 22, 2009 10:27 AM"manapp99 says"
In a previous post it was stated that "As California goes, so goes the country".
In 2005 for every $1.00 California sent to the Federal Government in taxes .78 cents was recieved back. California is a huge state and as it goes down so will the number of $$ sent to the federal government to pass out to other states. So yeah as California goes down other states will lose out too.
Posted by J Rae at May 22, 2009 10:29 AMSpeaking of running states, if you really ant to see a gong show of a state, come here to the plantation mentality idyll known as South Carolina-we've got 150 year old schools that will not be replaced because Sanford think that ebing the hardest of the hard will get him elected president in 2012. :(
Posted by herbal tee at May 22, 2009 06:33 PM"Since Proposition 13 was adopted in 1978 and began sharply limiting increases in property taxes, overall state revenue has gone up much faster than inflation and population growth." h/t signonsandiego.com
Similar story in West Virginia and New Hampshire, two other states Democrats run. Only those states decided not to dine at the public trough. They grew state government by 4 to 5 percent, they also have surpluses now for rainy days. California just had to expand by upwards of 11 percent each and every year.
The voters didn't decide to increase the number of state government and public school jobs paid for by taxpayers from 719,000 in 1997 to 895,000 in 2007 – an additional 176,000 employees. That translates into 48 added jobs a day every day for 10 years. Is this the job growth credit you want to give Republican governors Anonny? Swelling union memberships?
The voters didn't change laws to allow public employees to retire with extravagant pensions equal to 90 percent of their final pay – without resolving how to pay the eventual tab.
The voters didn't approve a 37 percent pay hike for prison guards and bizarre, unprecedented concessions to the guards that gave them a management say in Corrections Department decisions – helping make California prisons more than twice as expensive per-inmate than Florida's.
The voters didn't refuse to look at ways to relieve costly overcrowding at prisons, even as states such as New York enjoyed great success with reform measures.
The voters didn't spend the past decade creating a heavily regulated business climate that drove jobs and companies – and thus revenue – to other states.
It is absurd for any pundit or politician to blame voters for the budget disaster. And it's a canard that gets in the way of a constructive response to the crisis.
J. Rae, how much did California pay Enron?
Hey Euz, Andrew Sullivan now calls President Obama a conservative.
Posted by peter at May 22, 2009 07:03 PMThe problem is that the California government spends 120% of the revenue it takes in.
Sure, they could raise taxes but then they'd just spend 120% of that.
Starve the beast. Teaparty! BIG government failed in the Soviet Union and is failing in California.
Posted by JFixx at May 22, 2009 07:24 PMWhen I lived in CA I never got where all the tax dollars went.
Oh I understand that prop taxes were low (virtually non-existent for corps) and that CA's federal income taxes subsidize red states like Alaska, Kansas and Texas.
But even so the sales and income taxes were high as a percentage. Furthermore, the avg income is much higher than the nation, yielding higher net state income tax revenue per capita. And even with prop taxes fixed so low, with housing prices at absurd levels -- even in armpits like Fresno and Merced -- that helps offset the lower prop tax percentage.
Yet, with all that roads suck, transport sucks, schools suck (close to $4k/kid when I was there - down at the same levels as LA, MS and TX - and far below what rational states pay for public schools). Ok, the fact that roads suck is at least partially to be blamed on the Republican congress from 1995-2007, who typically would give as much in highway funds to a single county in Kansas (Johnson) as they did to the entire state of CA.
But even with all that, where's the beef?
Is it because so much of the state revenues are funneled to the big campaign contributing businesses: agriculture, energy, and prisons?
Posted by Anonny at May 22, 2009 09:06 PM"J. Rae, how much did California pay Enron?"
Billions to Enron, and we will be paying for decades probably.
Basically the powers to be in Sacramento should have placed the state on a rolling blackout schedule and told the power companies to F* off. Instead they went into panic mode and signed contracts we can't get out of.
Davis and the Democrats were bad for going along with it and the Republicans were bad for screaming the sky is falling and oh god don't let the lights go off.
And no one will ever figure out what happened to all the money from the property taxes. Sales prices tripled and quadrupled and the increased property tax money just evaporated.
Posted by J Rae at May 22, 2009 09:39 PMEnron was one of those companies set to make a bunch on wind energy and global warming.
Posted by peter at May 23, 2009 03:23 AMC'mon, give the crack addict another hit. He promises to go clean tomorrow.
By the way, wasn't it the "progressives" that pushed for initiatives in the early 20th century?
Why does Kalifornia have a program that spends tax dollars for in-home care by relatives that have to be members of the SEIU?
Why does Kalifornia have to provide illegal aliens with in-state tuition?
When are the unions going to give concessions?
Why are there public employees that have annual pensions of $500K?
If the Kalifornia government gives so many breaks to business and the wealthy, why are they leaving the state in droves?
Why is the dropout rate in the LAUSD at 50% yet they can afford to pay teachers that are impossible to fire?
Why is the LAUSD building extravagant facilities with enrollment falling?
And Kalifornia deserves no tears for paying more to the feds than they get back. Its mathematically impossible for everyone to get back more than they pay in. And this doesn't even take into account the handling charge by the feds.
Posted by skeptic at May 23, 2009 04:32 PM